Over 60 Lawmakers Support School Officials Who Prayed Over Meal
Letter of support signed by 62 members of Congress sent to Lay, Freeman and Winkler.
As America celebrates the 222nd Anniversary Two Florida school administrators who are facing jail terms for asking God to bless their meal, will arrive in court Thursday morning knowing that they have the support of more than 60 members of Congress.
Some members took to the House floor Tuesday to denounce the “criminalization of prayer” that “tramples on the First Amendment rights” of Christians.
The trail of Pace High School Principal Frank Lay and school Athletic Director, Robert Freeman “is one of the first times we’ve literally had the potential for the criminalization of prayer in the United States of America,” said Congressman Randy Forbes (R-VA), chairman of the Chair of the bi-partisan Congressional Prayer Caucus.
“The Founding Fathers would be appalled,” said Congressman Jeff Miller (R-FL), in whose district includes Santa Rosa County, where the lawsuit is based.
During a luncheon to honor those who contributed toward the school’s athletic Field House, Mr. Lay asked Mr. Freeman to offer a blessing for the meal; students were not present at the time of the blessing.
Nonetheless, the ACLU cried foul and ran to court claiming the two men should be held in criminal contempt.
If convicted, they face up to $5,000 in fines, six months in jail, and they may lose their retirement benefits.
Mr. Forbes says the matter has repercussions far beyond the penalties. Mr. Forbes predicts that if the two men are found guilty, “there will come a day when the speaker of this house will be hauled into federal court and threatened with jail because she dares to stand at that podium where you stand tonight and ask the chaplain to start our day with the prayer.”
Mr. Forbes along with more than 60 members of Congress, co-signed and sent a letter of support to Lay, Freeman and Winkler, assuring them that “we are standing with you in prayer and support as you face your trial.”
Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN) also took to the House floor Tuesday pulling no punches against the ACLU.
“Mr. Speaker, the problem is that this displays a trend and a tendency that we are seeing where groups like the ACLU strike at one school district after another, one public display of religious expression after another, until they have reached their ultimate goal, which is to purge the marketplace of ideas of any semblance of religious expression,” Bachmann said.
Mrs. Bachmann said on the floor, that if silencing religious speech comes to pass, “we will have turned the First Amendment on its head, and the Founders in turn will be rolling in their graves. I thank Mr. Forbes for bringing this to the attention of this body, and I share his shock, I share his dismay that criminal charges were brought on behalf of … Mr. Lay and Mr. Freeman for the simple act of engaging in prayer.”
Liberty Counsel will be representing Lay and Freeman in in federal District Court in Pensacola representing as they face criminal contempt charges for a prayer over a meal.
Mathew D. Staver, Founder of Liberty Counsel and Dean of Liberty University School of Law, commented: “While we celebrate our enduring Constitution [September 17 -s the 222 anniversary of the signing of the U.S. Constitution], we are reminded that liberty is always a generation away from extinction. Liberty is not inherited and is not transmitted in our DNA. Liberty must be secured by each generation. What a sad state of affairs, when on the day we celebrate the oldest and most enduring Constitution in the world, that honorable public servants are tried as criminals for praying over a meal. This may be the America the ACLU seeks, but it is not the America Liberty Counsel knows, nor is it the America the Founders envisioned.”
Related posts:
- Cali. School District Bows To ACLU Settlement Which Mandates “Homophopia” Training
- School District Involved In Prayer Case Faces New Battle
- School Officials Cleared of Criminal Contempt Charges in Case Involving Prayer!
- School Principal and Athletic Director Face Criminal Charges for Prayer at Luncheon
- Christian Educators Challenge ACLU’s Unconstitutional Demands
I think it is horribly wrong to criminally charge anyone for praying over a meal. It is an injustice against they’re freedom. In my opinion they need to bring god back to the schools and make it a focus,then maybe a lot of bad things would stop happening. Why is it also that it seems the christians get attacked yet when other religions express they’re freedom in and outside of schools it’s fine. Diversity is being taught! Gay people can express they’re selves in public and have the same rights as others but christians don’t have the right to express freely? Thanking God for a meal! Shows how free and just this country claims to be. This is my opinion.
The facts in this case, which I realize the author failed to provide you with, are that these 2 administrators violated a consent decree (which they both agreed to before this matter) which clearly stated they cannot pray at school functions. At issue here is the law, not religious rights. Our Constitution and Supreme Court clearly state prayer does not belong in schools.
Bonita, I would love to hear the cases where other religions have been given unfair rights in schools versus Christianity and I will gladly stand up in those situations as well and highlight the illegal nature of their position as well.
As for “god” being brought back into school, which one would you like to teach? Are we talking about Zeus, Allah, the vengeful god of the Old Testament, Vishna, Ra? Which is these would be best to teach to a country where religious freedom is clear for all? Why should an atheist have to listen to whatever the decision is here?
As far as teaching “god” helping address our problems, how would you explain Catholic priests touching little boys, or Ted Haggard doing drugs, or Jim Jones’ killing of 900+ people. All of these people indicated they fully believed in a god and all would be included in the list of people who “have done bad things”. God is not the answer and neither is misinformation and hate. We need rational conversations and a mutual sense of respect for everyone in this country – Christians, Jews, Muslim, atheist, gay, straight, black, brown, Asian, Mexican, African, etc. This country is free, but it is free for EVERYONE that lives here.
and which god would you presume to “bring back to the schools”? I dont believe this country was founded as a christian nation, and considering our country is made up of people of ALL faiths, and a large percentage of that melting pots children go to public schools, it would be wrong to push ANY view of god. Religious instruction belongs in religious institutions or the privacy of the home, so if you want your kids to be taught about god in their school, go pay the tuition fees and send your kids where they will be. but leave the public schools out of it!
Well stated (and much more succinct than me:)).
Bonita, I assume you are meaning when you say “bring god back to the schools” you mean whatever that god or gods may be, even though this site is mainly Christian. With that I slightly disagree. Practicing a religion’s god, considering how many religions can be in a school, would take ample amounts of funding, some funding which some states may not be able to afford. However, praying over a meal is not an arrestable offense, I would definitely agree. As Mrs. Bachmann said, it would completely override the 1st Amendment, thereby essentially giving the message that it’s okay to break the Bill of Rights or Constitution itself. And in the means of ‘diversity being taught,’ it’s true in some cases, like this one, but really I’ve never seen a Christian be attacked by anyone else before…
Interesting how you’ve omitted a major part of the story. They aren’t on trial for praying. They’re on trial for contempt of court because 19 days before the luncheon at issue here, Lay and the school district had approved a consent decree that they would not engage in any prayers at school-sponsored events. Those are important facts that should have been included in any honest discussion of this case.
Sarah. I think you misunderstood the article. I understood it perfectly fine. Would you say the story is about unruly school officials who willfully violate court orders? Glad to see the judge ruled correctly.
I misunderstood nothing. The article makes no mention of the prior suit, which involve some pretty egregious facts on Mr. Lay’s part that go way beyond a pre-meal prayer, or the consent decree of which Mr. Lay was fully aware. Yes, I would say the real story is about a court determining whether school officials willfully violated court orders. This article is so skewed, a reader who hadn’t encountered the story from any other source would think this story was about people being jailed for praying. Surely you can agree that is not a fair perception.
I did not hear the evidence, so I cannot say whether the judge ruled correctly or not. Unless you were in the courtroom and had read the consent decree, neither can you.
As we celebrate the signing of the Constitution, let us clearly understand that we do not live in a Christian nation. The document that you use to argue First Amendment rights is clear on this subject “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .”.
At issue here is not the ability for individuals to pray. Obviously that is a core part of our country and not up for debate. What is clear here is that these men chose to do so in a public school environment which is clearly against the law of this land as well as the US Constitution. Prayer has no place whatsoever in our schools and this is clear from all cases before the Supreme Court. Trying to play upon half truths and emotions is a poor way to win an argument and disappointing when you are using the anniversary of the signing of this document with such sanctimonious aplomb.
Would you have written this article if the 2 men had been Muslim and were reading from the Koran? What if there were a Hindu was on the stage at this school event and started chanting a mantras? The freedom of religion expands to all religions, but this also includes the freedom FROM religion. Our Founding Fathers were clear on this point and trying to twist the words and change the laws does not change this fact.
Thomas Jefferson was clear when he said…”Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”
I fully respect the rights of any person to practice your faith as a personal and private reflection of who you are and what you believe. But we are NOT a Christian nation and our laws clearly show this to be true. If we want to debate the facts of the case, we should clearly print them all so it is clear why these men violated the decree and thus the law.
Freedom of speech should prevail. These individuals did not require the other’s in attendance to pray with them. This was not an instance of a “government” entity attempting to force religion on anyone. No law was broken. In this country we have Freedom of Religion; but not Freedom from Religion. We will see others expressing their beliefs; but we are not forced to join them.
Contempt of court = jail time. Another attempt of “christians” trying to play the victim while they are clearly violating the law.
now dont get me wrong, I’m all about the separation of church and state and am definately not a christian… but I know for a fact that at least on occasion, Congress opens with a prayer of some kind. now… if they can do it, why not these school officials? I mean, so long as they’re not forcing or endorsing any kind of religious beliefs to the kids (or anyone else), they have every right to pray before their meeting. it’s like a kid deciding to say grace before he eats his lunch in the lunchroom. it’s their right to do so if they want.
in addition, to cite a quotation made by the guy who posted below me… “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .”. ….. “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”… hmm.. isnt that what the folks at the school meeting were doing? all concenting adults, nothing forced on any of them, during a lunch meeting.
c’mon now.. is it NOT possible that people on both sides.. left and right… take these issues just a leeetle too far?
Lorraine, it was a school function and the decree was clear that there would be no prayer at school functions. The reason for the decree in the first place was the ongoing and willful negligence of the school officials to follow the law in the first place.
As for Congress saying a prayer, I agree 100% this is a fight that should be fought and should not be allowed to happen in this country. We have set a double standard and we should certainly rectify that by eliminating prayer in Congress at all times.
yeah… to be honest I totally agree with you. since the separation of church and state exists (thankfully!) Congress should be a major roll model and live up to it by leaving prayer out of their sessions… even if they take a prayer from a different faith each time. it’s just so… hypocritical and it makes this issue with the school officials doubly hypocritical.
David,
Not everyone is guilty of contempt. It must be proven. He is clearly a Christian and he obviously did not intentionally violate a court order. There has to be an intent to violate it, and the judge ruled not guilty. Please be consistent. I am sure you can appreciate this.
If there was a restraining order against a person that says they are not to come within a 100 yards of the person. If the person was at the grocery store, and the other person showed up and they didn’t notice until they were pushing their shopping carts down the same isle, according to you David, the person with the restraining order should be in the slammer.
Be consistent. The law and judges leave room for things like this. Learn that!